On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 23:43 -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Michael Ellerman > <mich...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 18:54 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > >> Hi Michael, > >> > >> > > void early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch(unsigned long start, > >> > > unsigned long end); > >> > > >> > arch_early_init_dt_setup_initrd() makes more sense to me, but .. > >> > >> <foo>_arch has been the general convention for arch-specific hooks in > >> drivers/of/. > > > > Yuck, doh, guess I should have read those patches before they went in :) > > It's not necessarily permanent. My first goal is to get the common > code merged. Then I want to look closely at it for patterns and > refactor how the common code calls out to arch specific hooks (or > maybe turn it around and have arch code calling out to the common > bits).
Sure, no biggy. There is lots of precedent for arch hooks to be called arch_foo() or topic_arch_foo(), but it's not the end of the world. cheers
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
